"Cloud Computing" will not help graphics, physics or anything needing real-time computing because the latency between the console and the servers will be too great. Even then its all bullshit because since the console no longer requires an internet connection majority games will be required (unless its an online only MP Game) to be programmed with the idea that the console is offline first and foremost.
The only benefit I see from this magical cloud fairy is that we wont have to deal with client/host issues that plagued this generation, all games that have some kind of MP can have dedicated servers on call. Games like Dead Island and Borderlands I can see having the biggest benefit where they have a SP component that another player can jump in or be invited into instantly without leaving the current game.
Wrong. Dead freaking wrong.
That's exactly what they're saying,. OnLive has been doing it for years. And MS's Azure has been demonstrated as a capable platform for this as well. That's what RENDERING means. It means your actual graphics and everything else to boot. They also have the capability to use it as a hybrid system, where only some things, such as physics, or AI, or just persistent worlds OR dedicated servers for multiplayer matchmaking are leveraged for compute. It's completely flexible. Latency is not the obstacle people think it is. Get informed.
...Actually latency is the obstacle people think it is and it is the sole reason that cloud computing as Microsoft is describing is a complete impossibility.
I already have 25 ms/p to my closest hop in servers this will add what 10 ms? 35 ms/p is horrible in a game specially when you add in the latency of the controller, So 40 ms/p would have stuff poping in every where and textures not loading quickly.
@tepidshark: Yeah, it's still nice that these packages come with the side games. But one would expect an HD package to come with the main games you know?
A main game with new content never seen outside Japan, a "side" game and remade and fully voiced cutscenes from a bad game for $40 seems like a decent deal to me. They also updated the graphics and music rather than simply upressing the original game like most HD collections. I really don't see what the problem is, I don't even like Kingdom Hearts but I still think Square Enix did a better job than most companies on their HD port. If you want to complain about gouging the fans go over to the Wind Waker HD board and rant about Nintendo charging $50 for one game, because that's actually ridiculous.
358/2 Days wasn't a bad game.
....it totally was it was mind numbing I want to shoot my self dull and incoherent.
Opinions, Opinions. People keep using that as some sort of end all be all every scenario call when people get angry over reviews but it doesn't fit every situation and this is one of those.
Fine If Tom Mcshea legitimately thinks the game is worth a 4 *even though stuff below 5 usually has major major problems* then fine but I don't believe thats his true opinion there has been a clear rush for hits and ad revenue dollars since CBS interactive purchased cnet and its properties gamespot for a while now has seemed to concentrate solely on the bottom line instead of fair reviews so It seems this review was meant for page hits and nothing but page hits.
It kind of makes no sense to say its an improvement but it still feels bad, If the 360's dpad was crap and this is an improvement you technically can't call it crap as well.
As for that looking at the video it seems like Jago is doing all the actions hes inputing in with the dpad so whats the problem here? and Since I've never heard of blunty before I'll stick with some actual professional reviews once the systems are released.